The same fake news and propaganda has been succeeding for the White House and the Pentagon in Syria, see the roots of the fake news propagated by the “White Helmets”. The Pentagon is a beast not under control by President Obama. Most likely the Vice-president Joe Biden runs the foreign policy show contrary to the diplomacy efforts by John Kerry at the State Department. Is the VP using the same instruments and IO activity from the Bush years under Dick Cheney?

Fake News and False Flags

How the Pentagon paid a British PR firm $500 million for top secret Iraq propaganda

The third and most sensitive programme described by Wells was the production of fake al Qaeda propaganda films. He told the Bureau how the videos were made. He was given precise instructions: “We need to make this style of video and we’ve got to use al Qaeda’s footage,” he was told. “We need it to be 10 minutes long, and it needs to be in this file format, and we need to encode it in this manner.”

US marines would take the CDs on patrol and drop them in the chaos when they raided targets. Wells said: “If they’re raiding a house and they’re going to make a mess of it looking for stuff anyway, they’d just drop an odd CD there.”

The CDs were set up to use Real Player, a popular media streaming application which connects to the internet to run. Wells explained how the team embedded a code into the CDs which linked to a Google Analytics account, giving a list of IP addresses where the CDs had been played.

The tracking account had a very restricted circulation list, according to Wells: the data went to him, a senior member of the Bell Pottinger management team, and one of the US military commanders.

Wells explained their intelligence value. “If one is looked at in the middle of Baghdad…you know there’s a hit there,” he said. “If one, 48 hours or a week later shows up in another part of the world, then that’s the more interesting one, and that’s what they’re looking for more, because that gives you a trail.”

The CDs turned up in some interesting places, Wells recalled, including Iran, Syria, and even America.

“I would do a print-out for the day and, if anything interesting popped up, hand it over to the bosses and then it would be dealt with from there,” he said.

The Pentagon confirmed that Bell Pottinger did work for them as a contractor in Iraq under the Information Operations Task Force (IOTF) [], producing some material that was openly sourced to coalition forces, and some which was not. They insisted that all material put out by IOTF was “truthful”.

IOTF was not the only mission Bell Pottinger worked on however. Wells said some Bell Pottinger work was carried out under the Joint Psychological Operations Task Force (JPOTF), which a US defence official confirmed.

The official said he could not comment in detail on JPOTF activities, adding: “We do not discuss intelligence gathering methods for operations past and present.”

    Description Psychological Operations (PsyOps)

    The RAND Corporation explained: “Knowing what the adversary values and using the adversary’s own representational systems allows us to correlate values, to communicate with the minds of enemies in the verbal and nonverbal language of the enemy.”6

    In order to change the behavior of a TA, their perception, thoughts, and emotions must be modified. This requires that their decisionmaking cycle is accessed and influenced. Some publications refer to this as perception management.

    To accomplish this, the entire system which the TA relies on for information is interfered with. Each and every channel of communication is used as a conduit for PsyOp attacks. The Joint Publication of July 2006 entitled Military Deception (MILDEC) explained: “Conduits consist of all the systems, organizations, and individuals through which information reaches the adversary.”

    According to the RAND Corporation, almost complete control can be established over an individual’s consciousness, perception, and will, without causing physical harm. This is accomplished by interfering with their continuous cycle of perception, decisionmaking, and action. RAND says that the enemy will be paced during each phase of this cycle.

    Behavior modification also requires that the TA’s environment is changed. Multiple PsyOp products are used in combination to “shape the psychological environment” of the battlespace in order to influence the TA. This is done using as many different products as possible.

    To modify the behavior of the TA, their environment is changed using electronic, psychological, and physical means. These electronic, psychological, and physical actions include adding, modifying, or removing information from the environment. Obviously, the physical portion of this includes tampering with objects in the environment.

    “Through maximizing all media assets,” stated the Army, “and contracting with local companies, PsyOp personnel will expand their range of dissemination to reach the TA and influence attitudes and behavior.” The DOD announced that PsyOp themes are to be “powerfully disseminated directly to the targeted audiences” throughout the AO for “aggressive behavior modification.”

    “The information battle,” proclaimed the US Marine Corps, “must be fought across all available mediums and no possible channel of communication can be ignored.”

 « click for more info
Another Runaway General: Army Deploys Psy-Ops on U.S. Senators (Rolling Stone)

DOD IG Report – Series of Contracts Information Operations (IO)

This audit was requested by the Commander, U.S. Central Command. We also performed this audit pursuant to Public Law 110-181, “The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008,” section 842, “Investigation of Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in Wartime Contracts and Contracting Processes in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Our objective was to determine whether a series of contracts for Information Operations  awarded by Multi-National Force-Iraq (W91GDW-08-D-4013, W91GDW-08-D-4014, W91GDW-08-D-4015, and W91GDW-08-D-4016) met Federal Acquisition Regulation requirements. We also determined whether this procurement satisfied user needs.

What We Found
The Joint Contracting Command-Iraq/ Afghanistan awarded indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts to four contractors in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation. However, the Joint Contracting Command-Iraq/Afghanistan combined psychological operations and public affairs requirements in one contract. Although we did not obtain any evidence that psychological operations were intended for a U.S. audience, the contract language did not clearly differentiate between psychological operations and public affairs, as required by doctrine, creating the appearance that psychological operations were associated with a U.S. audience.

 « click for more info
The Pentagon, Propaganda, and Independent Media  

Media Services Contracts
On September 23, 2008, JCC-I/A awarded IDIQ contracts to Leonie Industries LLC; SOS International, Ltd.; Lincoln Group; and MPRI/L-3 Services, Inc. to provide a full range of media services to MNF-I.

…
Unintended Consequences
The contracts awarded on September 23, 2008, did not differentiate between the intended audiences for PSYOP and PA. Joint doctrine for PA (Joint Publication 3-61) states that PA can be disseminated to both U.S. and foreign audiences; however, joint doctrine for PSYOP (Joint Publication 3-53) states that PSYOP can only be disseminated to a foreign audience.

The SOW for the multiple-award contracts stated that:

    … it is essential to the success of the new Iraqi Government and the
    Coalition mission that both communicate effectively with our strategic
    audiences (i.e., Iraqi, pan-Arabic, international, and U.S. audiences) to
    gain widespread acceptance of their core themes and messages.

Further, the SOW noted that: “The establishment of multiple-award Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contracts will ensure effective communication of GOI [Government of Iraq] and Coalition themes and messages.” The SOW also listed PSYOP doctrine, guidance publications, and Fragmentary Orders as publications governing the media services objectives.

Continued below the fold …

The U.S. Counter-propaganda Failure in Iraq
by Andrew Garfield | Middle East Quarterly | Fall 2007, pp. 23-32 |

The challenge of developing focused “grass roots” campaigns is a difficult one. The dominance of national television and international satellite stations makes it difficult to direct precise messages to specific audiences. For example, developing an information campaign intended to undermine Sunni support for Al-Qaeda must vary among tribes and locales because the level of support among the Sunni main tribes varies from active involvement to violent opposition. No single theme will appeal to or resonate with all Sunnis. National television advertising, consequently, is not an ideal medium to convey nuanced messaging to multiple audiences.

To develop effective programming, the coalition’s cultural comprehension must also include awareness of audience preferences. Such knowledge mandates extensive social science and attitudinal research not available consistently to coalition planners. The coalition should refocus its efforts to develop nuanced “grass roots” campaigns, reinforced by regional and only limited national messaging. Unfortunately, the Multi-National Forces-Iraq, the major contracting authority for information operations, appears unwilling to adjust. In June 2007, it re-awarded a $199 million per year contract to Bell Pottinger, an international advertising company that for three years has been unable to show traction in the war of ideas. The company will pay over $100 million to Arab satellite TV stations to air 30- and 60-second commercials, most of which fail to resonate with Iraqis. Such paid advertisements will air on the same stations that air for free the messages and images of the enemies of the Iraqi government and the coalition.

[8]  This figure is based on U.S government contracts awarded since January 2007, including a $199 million contract to the British public relations company Bell Pottinger and one for $26 million to Leone Industries for information operations services.
[9]  In 2006, the coalition awarded contracts to various U.S. and British strategic communications and public relations companies including Bell Pottinger, Lincoln Group, SY Coleman, and SOSi. The awards which totaled several hundred million dollars varied in size from $5-7 million to Lincoln Group for information operations and polling management services to well over $15 million for national advertising campaigns executed by Bell Pottinger to promote coalition themes including the concept of Iraqi citizenship.

Fake News | SourceWatch |

The Los Angeles Times’ Mark Mazzetti and Borzou Daragahi reported November 30, 2005, that, “[a]s part of an information offensive in Iraq, the U.S. military is secretly paying Iraqi newspapers to publish stories written” by American “information operations” troops, which are then “translated into Arabic and placed in Baghdad newspapers … in an effort to burnish the image of the U.S. mission in Iraq.”

“The operation is designed to mask any connection with the U.S. military. The Pentagon has a contract with a small Washington-based firm called Lincoln Group, which helps translate and place the stories. The Lincoln Group’s Iraqi staff, or its subcontractors, sometimes pose as freelance reporters or advertising executives when they deliver the stories to Baghdad media outlets,” Mazzetti and Daragahi wrote. “The military’s effort to disseminate propaganda in the Iraqi media is taking place even as U.S. officials are pledging to promote democratic principles, political transparency and freedom of speech in a country emerging from decades of dictatorship and corruption.”

Military officials who are “familiar with the effort in Iraq” and “spoke on condition of anonymity because they are critical of the effort and were not authorized to speak publicly about it” said that it was “being directed by” the Information Operations Task Force in Baghdad, part of the Multi-National Corps-Iraq commanded by Army Lt. Gen. John R. Vines.”

Mazzetti and Daragahi wrote the “arrangement with Lincoln Group is evidence of how far the Pentagon has moved to blur the traditional boundaries between military public affairs — the dissemination of factual information to the media — and psychological and information operations, which use propaganda and sometimes misleading information to advance the objectives of a military campaign.”

U.S. troops’ “innovation” to win hearts and minds
…
In his December 1, 2005, press gaggle, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said [25] that “The Los Angeles Times was the first place” the White House had heard about “the military using this Lincoln Group to plant stories in Iraqi newspapers” and that “We have asked the Department of Defense for more information. General [Pete] Pace has asked people to look into the matter and get the facts, and so we want to see what those facts are.”

In response to the controversy, on December 2, 2005, the Lincoln Group issued a media release itself in which it stated that it had “consistently worked with the Iraqi media to promote truthful reporting across Iraq. Our priority has always been, and continues to be, accuracy and timeliness.”

“Our clients, our employees and the Iraqis who support this effort have maintained a commitment to battle terror with a powerful weapon – the truth.We counter the lies, intimidation, and pure evil of terror with factual stories that highlight the heroism and sacrifice of the Iraqi people and their struggle for freedom and security. We are encouraged by their sacrifice and proud to help them tell their side of the story,” it stated. [26]

In a December 2005 interview on ABC’s This Week program, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley claimed [27], referring to the controversy over the military covertly sponsoring Iraqi news, that Bush was “very troubled by it … If it is inconsistent with the policy guidance it will be shut down.”

On Fox News, December 5, 2005, Hadley said [28] that if the stories were factual, “‘it’s got to be done in a way that reinforces a free media, not undermines it.’ … The policy, he suggested the administration wanted to pursue is ‘support for a free media, for truth about what’s going on in Iraq — that is the policy.’ Asked by Wallace whether Bush viewed the reports of planted stories as ‘inconsistent with that policy,’ Hadley said ‘Yes. It’s very troubling. And if it turns out to be true, I think you’ll find that activity stopped.'”

Speaking on NBC’s Meet the Press, Republican Senator John McCain, said [29] that “if that’s the way to get stories, I’m not terribly offended by it.”

In “his most specific comments thus far about the information operations program,” U.S. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld told [30] interviewer Charlie Rose in February 2005 that his reaction to reports that the Lincoln Group paid Iraqi newspapers to run Pentagon-written stories was, “Gee, that’s not what we ought to be doing.” Rumsfeld said “he had not been initially aware of the clandestine program, and ordered it shut down” after the Los Angeles Times report. However, “Army Gen. George W. Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said during a Dec. 16 news conference — more than two weeks after the existence of the operation was revealed — that it had not been shut down.” An anonymous source told the LA Times that “the program in Iraq was still active as of a week ago.” In a separate talk, Rumsfeld said negative media coverage of the Iraq propaganda has a “chilling effect” on U.S. troops’ “innovation” to win hearts and minds.

Information Operations and Counterinsurgency in Iraq

Information operations are integrated into U.S. military campaign and crisis action planning and are valuable in changing the environment in which guerrillas thrive. I propose the Army develop an IO product in accordance with the Joint Information Operations Planning Handbook [issue 2012], using the scenario of an IO cell planning IO activities to further the campaign against guerrillas in Iraq. The commander’s intent is to degrade the guerrillas’ ability to coordinate attacks and to expose guerrilla members.

Joint planners developing an IO plan to deal with Iraqi guerrillas should work through this process. First, it is necessary to understand the problemsolving process, which includes the following steps:

  1. Identify the problem (not the symptom).
  2. Gather facts and make assumptions as necessary.
  3. Develop and evaluate possible courses of action (COA) or solutions.
  4. Select and execute the best COA or solution.

After understanding the tasks associated with the commander’s intent, the next step is to develop the IO objective: effect (desired) + target + purpose (sought). The goal is to control the environment by influencing the population in order to build popular support in key cities, especially within the Sunni Triangle, and to erode direct and indirect support of guerrillas in Iraq.

Success requires comprehending the intricacies of the Iraqi psyche–the tribal loyalties, the stubborn sense of national pride, the painfully learned distrust of America’s promises, and “the power of fear.”

The United States must convince Iraqis that the temporary U.S. military presence in Iraq is necessary to rebuild the country for the benefit of the Iraqi people. Developing a measure of effectiveness (MOE) for this type of objective is difficult.

U.S. commanders must reduce the ability of Iraqi guerrillas to gather information on U.S. units and operations. The guerrillas are likely doing so as part of the Iraqi population or by gathering information from willing agents among the population. U.S. forces must convince Iraqis that helping the enemy will have a negative effect on their future and persuade them to stop doing so and even to begin misleading the enemy.

Establishing a sufficient rapport and trust to entice Iraqis to provide information when they are unhappy with the guerrillas is one way to
produce this result.

 « click for more info
PSYOP Company distribute products in East Rashid, Baghdad, July 2007

U.S. forces must also make the Iraqi people aware of the progress, as Coalition Provisional Authority Administrator Paul Bremer reports.20
Bremer’s statements provide valuable material to use in an IO campaign. Iraqis must conclude that the U.S. military presence is good for Iraq, that the United States can protect Iraqis, and that the guerrillas will have a negative effect on their lives.  

The Pentagon. Information Operations, and International Media Development  | CIMA – NED |

    A core principle of the
    United States is that a free
    and independent press is
    vital to the formation and
    maintenance of democracies.

About the same time in 2004, the Joint Psychological Operations Support Element was formed at the U.S. Special Operations Command in Tampa. In June 2005, it awarded three contracts worth up to $300 million over five years to SYColeman, Lincoln Group, and SAIC to develop radio and TV commercials, Internet ads, podcasts, billboards, and more to improve foreign opinion of the United States.

    “If you want to influence someone,  
    you have to touch their emotions,”
    Col. James A. Treadwell

…
The Joint Contracting Command awarded four contracts to Leonie Industries LLC, SOS International, Ltd., MPRI/L-3 Services, Inc., and the Lincoln Group to provide media services to the multi-national force in Iraq-specifically to produce news stories and public service announcements for the Iraqi media. The contracts were for one year with two 12-month extension options, and they were worth up to $300 million per year for each company. An earlier contract to the Lincoln Group had proved embarrassing when it was reported that the contractor had been paying Iraqi media outlets to run “good news” stories that the company had generated. Partly due to a number of other information operations problems, Congress stepped in.  

Pentagon Funds Diplomacy Effort | WaPo |

By Renae Merle | Washington Post Staff Writer | Saturday, June 11, 2005 |

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon awarded three contracts last week, potentially worth up to $300 million over five years, to companies it hopes will inject more creativity into its psychological-operations efforts to improve foreign public opinion about the United States, particularly the military.

“We would like to be able to use cutting-edge types of media,” said Col. James Treadwell, director of the Joint Psychological Operations Support Element, a part of Tampa-based U.S. Special Operations Command. “If you want to influence someone, you have to touch their emotions.”

He said SYColeman Inc. of Arlington, Va., Lincoln Group of Washington, D.C., and Science Applications International Corp. of San Diego will help develop ideas and prototypes for radio and television spots, documentaries, or even text messages, pop-up ads on the Internet, podcasting, billboards or novelty items.

Treadwell’s group was established last year and includes a graphic artist and videographer, he said. It assists “psyops” personnel stationed at military headquarters overseas. Col. Sam Taylor, a spokesman for the Special Operations Command, which runs the Army’s Special Forces, Navy SEALs and other elite combat units, said the contractors might help the military develop commercials in Iraq, for example, illustrating how roadside bombs meant for soldiers also harm innocent civilians.

The companies would not comment.

The contracts come as the Bush administration has been criticized with claims of uncoordinated efforts to repair the United States’ post-Iraq . image problems abroad.

0 0 votes
Article Rating